Corbyn suggests earnings limit

[Cyclone]

Thank you for proving my point. So the CEO takes head office out of UK because of UK tax regime. How much tax does the UK now collect on his salary?

 

I suspect you don't know what HSBC stands for...

[Guest makapaka]

But a cap wouldn't be a solution would it. It would be completely unworkable, so mentioning it was pretty foolish.

 

Not necessarily - I don't believe it is perhaps the right solution but it's not unworkable.

 

It's only foolish in that he left it open to manipulation - there's nothing wrong with putting forward ideas.

[3 Tuns]

I suspect you don't know what HSBC stands for...

 

I suspect it stands for the same as it did in 2009 when he and his office were based in the UK and they paid their taxes here.

[saunaman]

Just thick as **** . losing the plot big style .

[L00b]

OK. So you think there is no way that UK based banks could move their operations overseas. That's one Brexit myth blown then.

In relation specifically to Brexit and HSBC, too late it seems.

 

Douglas Flint, Group Chairman of HSBC, told the Treasure Select Committee yesterday that HSBC is planning to shift 1,000 jobs to Paris in the short term (prior to the Article 50 2 year term). Besides others, as per Xavier Rolet (LSE chief exec).

 

Nothing surprising there, it's business contingency planning and execution, long foretold, and now coming about in no small part thanks to May's enduring fudging.

 

There's 1,000 (likely cap-able) jobs Corbyn isn't going to cap

[Cyclone]

I suspect it stands for the same as it did in 2009 when he and his office were based in the UK and they paid their taxes here.

 

Is there any evidence that it was related to taxation? Or even Brexit?

 

Any reply to this part of my post?

"Of course they could, but they can't delist from the LSE on the CEOs say so."

Because you were suggesting that if subject to a cap on salary CEOs would delist from the LSE and move their entire billion pound business abroad and to a different stock exchange...

 

---------- Post added 11-01-2017 at 09:10 ----------

 

OK. So you think there is no way that UK based banks could move their operations overseas. That's one Brexit myth blown then.

What this is actually a strawman, because I suggested nothing of the sort, nor is it a logical extension of what I said.

 

How many million pound plus salaries do you think there are in companies such as Apple, Google, HSBC and Yahoo.

 

In the UK, well HSBC paid 453 people over a million Euro in 2015. Apple, Google and Yahoo, probably very few if any since they are US based with little UK presence at an executive or high level engineer level.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Cyclone

[3 Tuns]

Is there any evidence that it was related to taxation? Or even Brexit?

 

Any reply to this part of my post?

"Of course they could, but they can't delist from the LSE on the CEOs say so."

Because you were suggesting that if subject to a cap on salary CEOs would delist from the LSE and move their entire billion pound business abroad and to a different stock exchange...

 

---------- Post added 11-01-2017 at 09:10 ----------

 

What this is actually a strawman, because I suggested nothing of the sort, nor is it a logical extension of what I said.

 

In the UK, well HSBC paid 453 people over a million Euro in 2015. Apple, Google and Yahoo, probably very few if any since they are US based with little UK presence at an executive or high level engineer level.

 

Actually you said the CEO couldn't take the decision to move the company and then pointed out that they had. In actual fact he now pays 14% tax in HK, so it is quite likely that rather more of them would be making the move if 100% tax were introduced.

But lets not split hairs here. The important thing is Corbyn has once again demonstrated that he is a mad man with no ideas how to run his party let alone the country. So the more idiotic his policies the less likely we are to ever see them implemented.

It never ceases to amuse me how his fan club rejoice and defend his jibberings.

 

---------- Post added 11-01-2017 at 09:52 ----------

 

Which surely makes it completely pointless. The rich generally don't get their income from salaried income. If there was a punitive tax on it, they would make sure they didn't.

 

As the top 1% of earners pay more than 25% of the total amount of income tax collected, capping salaries would be rather serious for the exchequer. If they don't earn it they don't pay tax on it, and the ones who simply move their income abroad don't pay it at all.

[Cyclone]

Actually you said the CEO couldn't take the decision to move the company and then pointed out that they had.

 

Allow me to quote myself to help you out there 3 Tuns. Try reading ALL the words.

 

I

 

The CEO of the company has no power to decide to move the listing of a company

 

You're also wrong when you say "they had". The company has not moved.

 

---------- Post added 11-01-2017 at 10:41 ----------

 

 

As the top 1% of earners pay more than 25% of the total amount of income tax collected, capping salaries would be rather serious for the exchequer. If they don't earn it they don't pay tax on it, and the ones who simply move their income abroad don't pay it at all.

 

A cap at the sort of level we're discussing here wouldn't even affect the top 0.1%, more likely it's the top 0.01%.

 

For 2015 you were in the top 1% if you earned over £159,000

 

Slightly different figures here, but in the same ballpark.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/datablog/interactive/2012/jun/22/how-wealthy-you-compared

Interestingly though it confuses wealth and income.

 

This one actually looks at wealth and doesn't get it confused like the guardian with income.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/ons-chart-on-wealth-inequality-in-britain-2015-12

Although it's not really relevant to this discussion.

Edited January 11, 2017 by Cyclone

[Robin-H]

Allow me to quote myself to help you out there 3 Tuns. Try reading ALL the words.

 

 

 

You're also wrong when you say "they had". The company has not moved.

 

---------- Post added 11-01-2017 at 10:41 ----------

 

 

A cap at the sort of level we're discussing here wouldn't even affect the top 0.1%, more likely it's the top 0.01%.

 

For 2015 you were in the top 1% if you earned over £159,000

 

Do you think if we had a cap at say, £1million, people earning above that much wouldn't leave for other jobs abroad, or avoid getting jobs here in the first place?

 

You mention Bob Dudley, with a total renumeration package of £14million. A total renumeration package doesn't mean his salary was £14 million, but even if his salary was 'only' £5million, would he be happy to take a £4 million a year pay cut?

 

I'm guessing not, so either that money would be given to him in other ways, making such a cap pointless (indeed the less money paid in salary the less income tax returns the government gets, tax on dividends etc is lower).

 

If he wasn't able to do that, I would imagine he (and others like him) would take a job elsewhere. Again, not really a positive outcome.

[Obelix]

It's a cap on salary he suggested, if someone owned the company then they would have the wealth inherent in the company wherever they lived.

US executive salary varies between $1 up to $100 million...

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 22:11 ----------

 

 

The CEO of the company has no power to decide to move the listing of a company, and there is no incentive for shareholders to support such a move.

High C level salaries in the country don't benefit shareholders in any way.

 

I don't think you would necessarily need the shareholders permission. If the Board wanted to move exchanges they can on their own - it's a business decision led by the CEO and CFO. For that matter any exchange and simply choose to delist the stock if you don't meet the requirements for inclusion, and another exchange can list your stock if it's being traded without your approval.